The implications of some of the ideas in this article may seem immoral, contrary to our ideals, or offensive. We state them because they are true, supported by documented scientific evidence. Like it or not, human nature is simply not politically correct.
In other words, Political Correctness = Denial of Reality. It's a fantasy world. This article, being one published by Psychology Today doesn't explicitly point out that much of the 10 "truths" they list, but ALL of them deal with aspects of the "gender war" started by the radical feminists that have infiltrated every level of culture and society.
Some of the "truths" are downright hilarious - because they directly contradict the so-called conventional wisdom fostered by feminism.
For example...
The midlife crisis is a myth—sort of
Many believe that men go through a midlife crisis when they are in middle age. Not quite. Many middle-aged men do go through midlife crises, but it's not because they are middle-aged. It's because their wives are. From the evolutionary psychological perspective, a man's midlife crisis is precipitated by his wife's imminent menopause and end of her reproductive career, and thus his renewed need to attract younger women. Accordingly, a 50-year-old man married to a 25-year-old woman would not go through a midlife crisis, while a 25-year-old man married to a 50-year-old woman would, just like a more typical 50-year-old man married to a 50-year-old woman. It's not his midlife that matters; it's hers. When he buys a shiny-red sports car, he's not trying to regain his youth; he's trying to attract young women to replace his menopausal wife by trumpeting his flash and cash.
No wonder women always talk about Men and their "mid-life crisis" they endlessly make snide remarks or demean or criticize any middle aged man that starts trying to "recapture youth." So middle aged ladies worried about their husbands or boyfriends, understand the true lie of political correctness and the conventional wisdom of a man's "midlife crisis:" it's not about "re-capturing" their youth...it's about capturing some current youth to replace YOU.
However, the authors of this article definitely saved the best for last:
Men sexually harass women because they are not sexist
An unfortunate consequence of the ever-growing number of women joining the labor force and working side by side with men is the increasing number of sexual harassment cases. Why must sexual harassment be a necessary consequence of the sexual integration of the workplace?Psychologist Kingsley R. Browne identifies two types of sexual harassment cases: the quid pro quo ("You must sleep with me if you want to keep your job or be promoted") and the "hostile environment" (the workplace is deemed too sexualized for workers to feel safe and comfortable). While feminists and social scientists tend to explain sexual harassment in terms of "patriarchy" and other ideologies, Browne locates the ultimate cause of both types of sexual harassment in sex differences in mating strategies.
Studies demonstrate unequivocally that men are far more interested in short-term casual sex than women. In one now-classic study, 75 percent of undergraduate men approached by an attractive female stranger agreed to have sex with her; none of the women approached by an attractive male stranger did. Many men who would not date the stranger nonetheless agreed to have sex with her.
The quid pro quo types of harassment are manifestations of men's greater desire for short-term casual sex and their willingness to use any available means to achieve that goal. Feminists often claim that sexual harassment is "not about sex but about power;" Browne contends it is both—men using power to get sex. "To say that it is only about power makes no more sense than saying that bank robbery is only about guns, not about money."
Sexual harassment cases of the hostile-environment variety result from sex differences in what men and women perceive as "overly sexual" or "hostile" behavior. Many women legitimately complain that they have been subjected to abusive, intimidating, and degrading treatment by their male coworkers. Browne points out that long before women entered the labor force, men subjected each other to such abusive, intimidating, and degrading treatment.
Abuse, intimidation, and degradation are all part of men's repertoire of tactics employed in competitive situations. In other words, men are not treating women differently from men—the definition of discrimination, under which sexual harassment legally falls—but the opposite: Men harass women precisely because they are not discriminating between men and women.
2 comments:
Lol!
What a great post!
I have been leaning, more and more all the time, to looking at this whole thing as sexual psychology and how it has been manipulated to remove freedom and replace it with Marxist Totalitarianism.
The more one looks, the more one finds.
Thanks for this great info!
"Men made all the decisions and the Housewife just meekly accepted subservience."
That should be true, how can we make it so?
A meek wife, imagine that, would be such a nice girl to have.
Post a Comment